Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

thsoundman sends in a blog post from Rahul Sood, CTO of HP's gaming business, who claims there was once a project in development at Microsoft to let Xbox users compete against PC users playing the same game. According to Sood, the project was killed because the console players kept getting destroyed by their PC counterparts. He wrote, "Those of us who have been in the gaming business for over a decade know the real deal. You simply don't get the same level of detail or control as you do with a PC over a console. It's a real shame that Microsoft killed this — because had they kept it alive it might have actually increased the desire of game developers and gamers alike to continue developing and playing rich experiences on the PC, which would trickle down to the console as it has in the past."

It's not really surprising. There are some console players good with a gamepad, but it really doesn't work as well as a mouse and keyboard combo. With FPS games you cannot turn your character as fast and precisely as you want to, and don't even get me started on how real-time strategy games work with consoles. Keyboards also have a lot more keys available.

There is also significant amount of more intelligent gamers on PC who play strategy games, old games like nethack and adom, simulation games... They have a strategit intelligence. Consoles on the other hand are quite much just racing games, fighting games and some badly controlled FPS games.

PC gamers are also more active in modding community, programming and everything else since it's an open platform.

Not on 4.3. If there were an official modding facility for Brawl beyond the Stage Builder, that'd be one thing, but the more thorough mods for Wii games rely on a jailbreak that Nintendo has since fixed in the firmware shipped on new Wii consoles.

I happen to agree with you. It's a shame you've been modded "troll," but maybe it was your tone.

The truth is, the article writer really has no idea why Microsoft canceled the project. He's just speculating. It also doesn't state the kinds of games that were tested. While I've long believed that RTS, FPS and MMORPG are superior on a keyboard and mouse, I have a hard time believing the same would be said about fighting, platforming, or racing games.

1st Post: the biggest problem with the cross-platform play between PC and 360 on Shadowrun is that the developers nerfed the PC mouse control scheme in an effort to balance the playing field between Analog and Mouse users. This is the main reason why I never got this game. Even worse, to better even out the playing field, developers went the extra mile in giving analog users aim assist while the PC players get nothing.

2nd Post: If thats not enough, FASA also implemented a feature which causes the reticle to EXPAND during quick movements, thus lowering the players accuracy with a mouse, making it impossible to quickly turn and maintain accuracy, reducing the potential advantage of playing with a mouse. This game had a TON of potential only for it to be dragged down because of ideas like this. I do realize this was done to even out the playing field but there had to have been a better way.

Listen to what the developer says... "our job is to make sure it's a fun experience where both sides feel they can play against each other". Isn't their job to simply connect the two games together? Why the ensuring of a fun experience so that they feel they can play together? He'd never say this about two PCs playing together. So yeah, they nerfed the PC.

Listen to what you are saying. A video games developer shouldn't think about whether or not their game is fun? And for the record, PC game developers DO spend a lot of time trying to ensure that the game is 'fun' between two PCs

No shit, Sherlock. In case it wasn't clear, what I mean is that presumably they've already ensured the game is fun between people playing on the same platform. If they haven't, then they might want to look at an alternate profession.

What the dev is talking about is the extra work involved to allow two separate platforms to play together. Now if the game were already fun in and of itself on each individual platform, why would it require any extra work at all to ensure it's fun between different platforms

The mouse and keyboard are superior controllers for most types of games. In the case of FPS games, the difference is night and day. There's just no way to stack up with a controller, no matter how good you are. Now for other games that is not always the case. Personally I have a game pad, a flight stick, and a wheel since I love games and I get out the controller that is appropriate for the game. However FPSes, MMOs, strategy games, RPGs, the mouse/keyboard reign supreme.

This is also why you'll see some differences in PC and console FPS design. Console FPSes use auto aim, of course, but also deal with things in a slower, less engulfing, fashion than found in some PC FPSes. With a gamepad you cannot quickly whip your character around and check your back, so it is no fun to have something where you are getting jumped from all sides. However on a PC, sure, that's a good way to add to the challenge and bring fast reflexes in to play.

Some games are just not good for consoles. Nothing wrong with that, just something to accept. As for cross platform play, I'd love to see more of it, however it just needs to be done right. In the case of any shooter games, make it co-op only. Also choose the games wisely. Street Fighter 4 probably would work well cross platform, no real advantage anywhere there. Bad Company 2, not so much the console people would get slaughtered.

I don't know if I'd go as far as to say MOST games. I'd give the keyboard and mouse FPS, RTS and MMRPGs. But I'd give the controller fighting, racing, platforming, flying, and pretty much any third person game where the camera is not fixed behind the character.

Interface is interface. Rather than use my mod points to mod you down, (your post really doesnt meet mod criteria and I don't do the -1 disagree like some jackasses).

It isnt the cameral angle...seriously have you played any PC FPS games? Racing games have been around for a very long time and are very enjoyable. And flight simulators? Seriously? Ever heard of a feedback joystick?

Where console game beat PC is in price, and the fact that you know your game will work. There are fewer variables in the har

The mouse and keyboard are superior controllers for most types of games.

Not only is gaming on a computer superior from a control point of view, but the difference in console control has led to the horrible "innovation" of third-person gaming.

Anyone who has played an immersive first-person shooter and the clumsy third-person game (I'm thinking Splinter Cell Conviction, Mass Effect 2, etc can tell you that the 3rd person shooter is a big step backward. Instead of feeling like you're actually in the game, you feel like you're controlling a marionette with slack wires. Walk up to a low wall in a third-person game and you don't know if your character is going to jump over it, use it for cover or just run into it and stand there. You end up making adjustments that necessarily detract from the experience.

Sure, there are games on consoles that are fun, but at what price to gaming overall? I often think that we'd be a lot better off if the Xbox and Playstation had failed. In fact, sales of the PS3 have only now become profitable for Sony, who like Microsoft clings to consoles in order to enforce their greed, using the unprovable statement that "piracy" has made PC gaming less profitable as rationale. Well, if sales of the PS3 have only recently become profitable, then it stands to reason that Sony is more than willing to lose money in order to cling to its agenda of locked-down, locked-in computing. The same agenda that led to rootkits and other abominations by Sony. One reason I refuse to buy a console is because I choose not to enable this attack on computer gaming, which is still the killer app of the personal computer.

That unwillingness to enable bad corporate behavior prevents me from purchasing other products too, and from companies that I have supported in the past, like Apple. I still replace my Mac Pro and Macbook Pro every few years, but I won't buy an iPhone or iPad. I don't want to lend my two cents to Apple's belief that people will buy anything they make, no matter what. Of course, the effect of my partial boycott is non-existent, but at some point I've got to be able to live with myself, and supporting consoles (and third party shooters) and locked-down platforms would make living with myself harder than it already is.

>>>the 3rd person shooter is a big step backward. Instead of feeling like you're actually in the game, you feel like you're controlling a marionette with slack wires. Walk up to a low wall in a third-person game and you don't know if your character is going to jump over it, use it for cover or just run into it and stand there. You end up making adjustments that necessarily detract from the experience.>>>

While I agree with most of what you say, I think that if it were done with a ton of testing before release, a fps could work out quite well. The catch is you'd have to keep the console gamers confined to a tailor made 'class', say a heavy-armor soldier with heavy firepower, and keep pc gamers with lightly-armored and lightly weaponized soldiers. Rather than worrying about how to balance classes using the traditional methods, use the limitations of the differences between the console and pc as the limits o

> The mouse and keyboard are superior controllers for most types of games.> In the case of FPS games, the difference is night and day.

Define superior...

What people tend not to appreciate is that FPS mouse controls allow you to change your view at speeds limited only by how fast you move you mouse, which might as well be infinite relative to the update rate of the game. Joysticks necessarily limit speed as they have a maximum and much more limited resolution (meaning that if you turn the speed up you

I'd wager that if games capped the turning speed on mouse controls console gamers would be _much_ more competitive with PC gamers. As it stands now though, PC gamers have an advantage that I would have to classify as unfair, not superior.

"If you handicapped someone, they'd have less of an advantage."

I'm sorry, but you're looking at it completely back-ass-wards, and possibly as stupidly as you can. You do not get an even playing field by artificially limiting how well the best players can do. If it's purely an equipment difference, you improve the bad equipment.

If you're going to make it so that I can't play to the best of my ability, just to make up for the bad equipment other people are using, I'm probably not going to enjoy the game very much. You'll have your even playing field, because all the PC gamers will have walked off it.

that's pretty much flat out wrong, mice are more precise, period. if you cap the max turn speed it will do almost nothing to the most powerful part of it, which is the ability to move the sight 5 millimetres to the left and cap someone in the face. gross mouse controls are irrelevant, how often do you need to instantly shoot directly behind you? besides, you could essentially make a joystick turn as fast as you want, it would just exacerbate the issues with them.

I hate K&M gaming for F/TPS specifically because of how insanely responsive the controls are.

Any time I can be running, turn in place 167 degrees, and hit something at 50 ft. with any kind of accuracy—in.25 seconds no less—the game has lost me. There is something to be said for fun over realism, but I think PC games take it way too far to the point where it is no longer fun.

I like being forced to actually bring the gun around to the target in more time than it takes to flick a wrist,

Different tastes for different people. Playing Mass Effect on my friend's Xbox gave me the impression it was a terrible game; I picked it up on a Steam sale on a whim and loved it.
I gave up on Deadspace about 20% through because the artificially slowed controls were too aggravating. I desperately wanted to like it, but it's not fun for me.

I pity you FPS addicts who will never know the pleasure of weaving your on-screen character through an intricate ballet of running, jumping, dancing, and attacking. There's a real pleasure to choreographing your moves on the fly in a third-person game and watching a superbly-animated character perform them that's totally lost when you're a viewpoint with an arm and a gun hanging somewhere beneath it.

FPS games are designed with a keyboard and mouse in mind; handheld controllers suck for these actions. But if the tables were turned, with games designed around a controller, I suspect you'd find that the PC players would be the ones defeated by an inadequate interface. I mean, boot up MAME and try playing Robotron with a keyboard, see how far you get, then go find a lovingly-maintained cabinet of the same game and feel the joy of grabbing dual joysticks.

And you know, that actually makes sense, at least for multiplayer games. If they allowed a mouse in most competitive games, it would be as disruptive as allowing cheat codes. Players shouldn't be allowed to get an advantage because they've bought an extra peripheral. Same reason PC vs Console doesn't work in competitive settings.

What about things like gamepads versus steering wheels in racing games. Surely the 1080 on a wheel gives a huge competitive advantage to the inch or so of traverse on a mini-analog. Should those be dis-allowed on games that support time trials and head-to-head racing? What about online flight sims and people using full size joysticks or HOTAS setups?

So... there aren't any flight sticks for flight sims, steering wheels for racers, arcade sticks for fighters, or turbo settings on 3rd party controllers because players shouldn't be allowed to get an advantage because they've bought an extra peripheral?

Perhaps there is an actual, consistent argument for not permitting a mouse to work with a console, but that most certainly is not it.

You're only talking about FPS. What about, for example, strategy games or serious simulators? I am sure PC players would pwn console gamers in those.
In fact, you can already put mouse and keyboards for 360, but they still don't seem to compare.

Nah, that's ridiculous. You're arguing that PC gamers are just gosh darn more skilled and intelligent than console gamers; more handsome, too, no doubt. Which group are you in? Let me guess... a PC gamer, coincidentally.

PC gamers obviously dominate console gamers in FPS and twitch RTS because of the the input method. That's it. The number of 360 owners that play with a mouse/keyboard is negligibly small. The mouse is a much faster and more precise controller than an analog stick. The wiimote, as an alternative, is in-between the two; I suspect if there was a multiplayer, cross-console FPS between Wii and 360 owners, the Wii owners would dominate the 360 owners. Not because they're better players; it's because of the edge their controller gives them.

In a way, if a 360 owner could hold their own against a PC owner in a FPS, I would argue the console 360 owner is probably a much better player. Winning because of a better hardware configuration isn't really a test of skill.

Your statement about PC gamers being better at strategy games or serious simulations is just silly, unless by 'strategy' you mean something like Starcraft, which is as much a twitch game as it is strategy.

There are tons of them, and they sell a shitload, despite the fact that the mouse is such a better control.

In fact, I think it might even be BECAUSE of that to an extent. Lot of PC shooties are pretty hard core. You are expected to have some badass reflexes to do well. That is fine... For people with said reflexes. However not everyone has them, and it diminishes with age. Ok well consoles help equalize that. Because of the limitations of the controller, you can't make people react as quick, and you have to

All it amounts to are full keyboard and mouse, and microsoft can make a ton of cash by selling them as add on accessories for the xbox360... They are just being stupid and stubborn clenching to the controller

Yep. It's not that PC gamers are inherently more skilled than console gamers. Take the best PC gamers and the best console gamers and put them on consoles and PCs respectively, and you'll still see the PC destroy the console.

You're right. A lot of console gamers wouldn't know what to do with themselves. In fact, a lot of console gamers would be incredibly surprised to realize that all this time, they've been using aim-assist (I say aim assist instead of auto-aim, because auto-aim can also refer to mods that are far more influential than aim assist). If you were to ask the random console Bioshock player or Left-4-Dead player if the game had aim assist, I wouldn't be surprised if most of them said "no." But they do.

Personally, I think it's kind of a testament to how well aiming assist has been implemented into console games. It's almost transparent, and still allows for a wide range of skill. PC gamers who don't play console games very often probably still think of aim-assist the way they think of auto-aim, that the cross-hairs instantly snap to a players head or that bullets that wouldn't have hit magically hit their targets. While the latter is still the case in some games (like left 4 dead), the former doesn't exist in any game that I am aware of. Instead, the aim-assist acts more like a weak magnet. Large analog movements have less impact the closer you get to your target. So in, say, Call of Duty, holding the analog stick all the way to the right when not targeting an enemy causes you to turn quickly. But when you're targeting a person, the person acts as kind of a magnet which means you can use larger analog movements to fine tune your shot. It's an amazing system that works considerably well and is the ONLY reason fps games work on consoles.

That being said, as a PC gamer and a console gamer, I have to say I think there are quite a few PC gamers out there who still think there's little-to-no skill involved in console shooters and that playing a console shooter couldn't POSSIBLY be as fun as playing it on the PC. I think this is a shame as I find console games with clever aim-assist to be quite fun, not at all frustrating, with a ride range of skill levels and very entertaining.

I've noticed the Aim assist in console shooters and I must say I really like the feature, it's the most obvious when you aim at a slow moving enemy as your aim will seem to follow the enemy automatically almost without input (You need to move the stick a bit, but the aim will follow the enemy perfectly).

This allows people like me that are not terribly hardcore to still have a great shooter experience and get lots of head-shots that would otherwise be impossible for me.

The important thing to realize is not that the input types evolved to improve gameplay, but rather that the games evolved to fit the controllers that were commonly available. FPS's were born on the PC, so it's not surprising that they're best played with the keyboard/mouse. Platformers did most of their growing on consoles, and that's why they work better there.

The important thing to realize is not that the input types evolved to improve gameplay, but rather that the games evolved to fit the controllers that were commonly available. FPS's were born on the PC, so it's not surprising that they're best played with the keyboard/mouse. Platformers did most of their growing on consoles, and that's why they work better there.

TFA doesn't say what games were tested, but if they were console ports from PC, I would expect PC games to win becuase you're going from something d

Take the best PC gamers and the best console gamers and put them on consoles and PCs respectively, and you'll still see the PC destroy the console.

TFA claims they took the "best" console players and "mediocre" PC players, and the PC players still won every time.

They don't even need to market a different controller to consoles. The main thing they can do to help balance the field is to cap the PC version's mouse sensitivity to at or lower than that of the console's turn rate, and only use a few keyboard keys to do everything.

Even so, I'm sure PC players would still win. The mouse is simply a far superior pointing device to anything controlled by my thumbs.

The main thing they can do to help balance the field is to cap the PC version's mouse sensitivity to at or lower than that of the console's turn rate, and only use a few keyboard keys to do everything.

This is a very good way to make sure that no PC gamer will ever launch your game more than once.

I tried a third party accessory that lets you plug in a keyboard and mouse, but the latency was nasty. It just wasn't responsive enough to be usable.
If they sold a keyboard and mouse that compared to the PC gaming experience, I'd buy it.

Sorry to say I haven't checked this out but they don't? I mean the Wii, Xbox 360, and PS3 all have USB ports on them. You'd think you could just plug in any old keyboard and mouse and it'd work. (Hell, didn't Unreal Tournament on the PS2 support keyboard and mouse?)

Not everybody plays online; in fact, it's an extra-cost option on Xbox 360. This means games are likely to support offline multiplayer. I imagine that one reason for lack of keyboard and mouse support on console games, and one reason that Microsoft's ban[1] hasn't been reconsidered, is that four keyboards and four mice won't easily fit around one TV.

[1] Microsoft doesn't allow games to use a keyboard for anything but chat, apart from a couple special case exceptions like FFXI.

They don't even have to offer a keyboard/mouse controller. Offer a controller with a (good) touchpad in place of the right thumbstick. WSAD+Shift only offers 2bit input for movement, so the thumbstick is superior there. So this would give you absolute input for aiming, and high-res relative input for motion. Sounds damn near perfect to me.

For FPS, aiming with a touch pad with just your left thumb is nowhere near as accurate as controlling a mouse with your hand, wrist, and arm. You're also still limited by the edge of the touch pad, a 360 turn would involve sliding to the edge of the pad, then lifting your thumb and moving it to the other side of the pad, then sliding it across again.

But I do like the touch pad controller idea, I wonder if anyone has it in the works. It would add the option of being able to tap to select objects on screen,

It has nothing to do with being stubborn. They won't put keyboard/mouse support on the xbox for the same reason they didn't allow PC players to play xbox players - people sticking with the controller would get destroyed. Why would they want to intentionally ship a console in which the standard hardware puts you in a position to fail?

All it amounts to are full keyboard and mouse, and microsoft can make a ton of cash by selling them as add on accessories for the xbox360... They are just being stupid and stubborn clenching to the controller

A keyboard and mouse have to be optional, the controller has to be the primary device. The controller is smaller, costs less and most importantly works while sitting on the floor or couch. A keyboard and mouse can not be included because costs must be manically controlled in the console market. So developers and gamers are in a situation where each side passes on the keyboard/mouse until the other side shows interest in it.

Some people enjoy the controller. I like being able to sit back on a couch without a keyboard in my lap and old text book as a mouse pad. It is certainly not as precise, but really, why does anyone care? It is a game. Do you refuse drinks at the bar so you can have that slight advantage when you play darts with your friends? Lots of testing has gone into balancing the games for the default controller; it is not the most precise way to play but those are the rules of the game. As long as people are not

Not that big a deal for new games, but what about the huge library of existing games that won't be able to support it?

If the games were reading existing controls through an API rather than bit-banging hardware ports, the driver should be able to translate keyboard keypresses into player 1's gamepad keypresses. It'd be like JoyToKey for Windows, except in reverse. But then the operating system on something like a Wii is so thin [hackmii.com] that it might not be possible.

Are you insinuating that pc gamers with suffer hand problems sooner than console gamers?

That's pretty absurd. I don't know about you, but I have larger hands than average -- I'm 6'2, it comes with the territory -- and my hands ache after as little as an hour of using a playstation controller. I've not used the newer xbox controllers recently. The original, gigantic xbox controller WAS comically large, but also a much more comfortable controller than anything since the n64's funky three-hands-fit-on-it af

Can I get more performance out of mouse/keyboard? Sure. But I have less fun when I do so!

How does that work? Is not being good at something fun for you? Do you enjoy that you have difficulty doing exactly what you're trying to do? Isn't the point of a good controller to allow you to make your character do exactly what you're trying to? I remember when I was playing F.E.A.R. on a 360 that I had more success strafing because I couldn't aim worth a damn. I guess I didn't really consider that "fun", which is probably why the 360 hasn't been turned on in months.

Can I get more performance out of mouse/keyboard? Sure. But I have less fun when I do so!

Why on earth do you have more fun when you're able to control your game less well? I really don't understand where you're coming from with this - I personally just get a little frustrated when on my new console I can't control my character as well as I did back in PC DOOM days (though I have enjoyed some FPS's on consoles). How is an inferior interface adding to the experience?

I got a wireless mouse and keyboard working on my XBox 360 and then played through Modern Warfare 2 in single player mode. On my back projection TV from 1999, I was doing on average a lot better on XBox live than I was with the control pad. We set it up on my friends massive LCD with a very high response time and I felt unstoppable. It seems when you increase the input devices and give me finer tuned control I can concentrate on that and get further up the curve more easily. Might not be the same for some people but if you want to walk all over people, see if your device supports keyboard and mouse through USB and then relearn the game. It took a while but it got to the point of not being fun anymore.

I'd imagine on average the PC user would trounce the XBox 360 user. For me the killer aspect was reducing having to use my thumbs on two joysticks to look around down to the two dimensional plan of my mouse pad. Had to tweak the sensitivity a bit but really two different worlds.

You obviously cant get official keyboards or mouse for 360 because it would give you too much advantage. You can use such for web browsing and everything else, but not to actually control the game. You can also get some unofficial products, but since the games aren't designed to be played with keyboards and mouses, they are quite much useless.

"...see if your device supports keyboard and mouse through USB and then relearn the game. It took a while but it got to the point of not being fun anymore. "

So true with FPS's, on a console controller you are using the relatively few muscles that do the mechanics of thumb movement, versus the mouse you have the advantage of all the degrees of freedom that your carpal joints provide, not to mention the extra muscle control. Serious basement dwellers especially benefit from the full motion wrist control, many have it fine tuned to an art after many *sessions*.

Except folks who use those mice(?) with the trackballs. You guys are just weird. If your going to go

Except folks who use those mice(?) with the trackballs. You guys are just weird

RSI sucks, that's the reason for the trackball. In FPS it's hard at first but I think I got within about 80-95% of my ability with the mouse (estimated just after a stint using the trackball). The problem with using a mouse is that the pain from RSI eventually drops my performance to where it's below that with the trackball, so it's not sustainable.

I forgot about that issue. You raise a valid point in that the seeming majority of trackball users (citation needed) go that route for medical reasons, at least this seems true with the folks I have spoken with.

This was supposed to be a big selling point for Shadowrun, the FPS that was released for the 360 and the PC. Perhaps more accurately, it was supposed to be a selling point for both Windows Vista (since it wouldn't run on XP) and LIVE subscriptions, but the whole thing fizzled rather quickly on both platforms.

Just don't mix the two on games where one has an advantage over another. I don't imagine people playing games like Uno, Poker, or pinball are going to be any better because of the platform they're on. Heck, on old arcade games and shooters like Geometry Wars the controller may be an advantage. I know I have a much easier time flying in Flight Simulator X with my 360 controller connected to my computer than when using the keyboard (although I'd probably do even better with a stick, but never bothered to b

I didn't like any of the joysticks they were selling at Fry's that day. Also, I had a super nice force feedback joystick buried in a storage tub, but apparently it wasn't a top seller as I couldn't even find drivers for the old thing. I picked up the 360 wireless USB adapter for computers and that worked just fine for my needs.

I had actually bought the game as therapy to help understand flying. I had an experience with severe turbulence on a 747 while descending into Hong Kong. The game actually helped

When it comes to certain types of game such as the FPS, the keyboard and mouse is a superior input method. But what I don't understand is why more games on consoles don't support keyboard and mouse as inputs. After all both Xbox and PS3 can have these attached, it's just support in actual games is lacking.

This is not to say that the console gamepad controllers don't have their own advantages. They are much better for "relaxed" gaming when you are sitting back on the couch, and "social" gaming, with more tha

But what I don't understand is why more games on consoles don't support keyboard and mouse as inputs.

Mapping input from one control device to another is not an easy problem to solve, just look at all the PC to console ports or visa verse, most suffers from rather huge control issues. There simply is no need to go through all that trouble when it doesn't provide any real benefit.

Also precision simply isn't really much of an important design goal, if it would be, we would all play with aim-bots as those beat unaided mouse controls quite easily.

... at least, it should be. Where's the freaking mind-reading controllers already?! I want to just look at the screen and be able to control it all!
It's like this: Mind-reading controller is as much better as keyboard and mouse controller as keyboard and mouse controller is better than console game pad.

The mouse has precission, and the keyboard a verb (the keyboard is like a whole language at itself).

But the people can be very quick to react to the tiny verb set of the pad. So the console dudes are fast at Quick Time Events, fast and precise. So you can make a game where the console people is better than the pc dudes. You have to add combos, quicktimeevents, and nerf the need for precission (having spray and pray weapons, and autoaim).Is doable.

Combos/chords work on keyboards. They are merely more commonly used out of necessity on a gamepad. On a keyboard it is more natural to use different keys, in particular to use mnemonics to aid in recalling where a key is found.

Just as a keyboard and mouse can be used to more precisely control a video game than a control pad, the new motion-based controllers will offer control pad users a whole new breed of competition that they can slaughter with ease.

Anecdotally you can see this already with games like Mario Kart Wii. Simply using the controller and nunchuck offer superior precision and control compared to when using the controller as a steering wheel, even with the aid of the steering wheel plastic mold.

I'm a solid PC gamer, and hate consoles. But I have to admit that if they got the WIImote to be more accurate and the nunchuck a little more intuitive they would probably surpass the Keyboard/Mouse as far as accuracy. All they'd need to then is get some decent games on the WII... lol

Sometimes I'll get into a discussion about gaming and someone will ask what system I use, my reply is almost always "PC. I'm a grown-up."

I retired from Console gaming 12 years ago. $60+ games, shitty fps controls, no upgrade-ability and a lot more have made console gaming something that I was happy to leave in my past.

Console gaming is kind of like prison-sex. Some people actually prefer it, some people enjoy it, a bunch of people do it because it's all that's available and I completely abstain. If I can't do something the right way, I'll not do it at all.

I don't think the traditional console pad can claim any kind of victory there either. The best experience with fighting games comes from a fightstick, or failing that a fightpad, which makes sense as they better emulate the arcade roots of the genre.

What you say is true of the Wii and the Xbox 360. It is not true of the PLAYSTATION 3, where Metal Gear Solid 4 takes several minutes to cache several GB to the hard drive when you get to a new act or you switch to another saved game that's on a different act.

There is a significantly smaller chance someone else is [capable of] cheating online.

And few to no legit fan-made mods either. If the first Half-Life were a console exclusive, there would likely have been no Counter-Strike.